#190: walkingonthinicewiththis - Re:

The potential parking issues is very different to the current site. Thare is no safe link to walk between the proposed site and the church car park or the village hall car park, unless taking a very long route through Cranbrook Drive, Park Drive and then onto Tunstall Road. Also, the School would be doubling in size. Now I don't agree with the local scaremongers that this represents a doubling in traffic (siblings, walkers, cyclists etc.) but there will be more cars, so the current "squeeze" won't work. I think the use of the additional land (or part of it) for a car park would be a worthwhile investment on safety and traffic flow grounds, and potentially it would increase the marketable nature of the School for hiring of facilities (but don't tell the locals this!) - scout groups hiring the hall, sports teams hiring the grass areas, local (maybe village!) societies using the hall.

#189

#191: - Re: Re:  

I agree that more thought should be given to the parking, entry/exit points, but that does not mean I oppose the planning application. I think that even those that will never agree with the development have a vital contribution to make by making constructive suggestions to how they would make the current plans better, as "Just don't do it!", may be a missed opportunity for them. If objective observations are made then whilst the final plans may not be what they would have chosen, they may potentially be able to say "It's not what I wanted at all, but it's better than it could have been".

Incidentally it is 0.49miles from the proposed school entrance at the new site to the front door of the church via Cranbrook Drive / Park Drive and 0.32miles to the church's from door if you went directly from the proposed school entrance at the new site to the front door of the church straight up the Tunstall Road.